Shiwiii

I think where we are having differences is the application of likeness, or equality. That is what is being conveyed in the scripture based on the Greek word used. G2531 καθώς kathōs kath-oce' From G2596 and G5613 ; just (or inasmuch ) {as} that: - according {to} ({according} even) {as} {how} when.

"The word "as" does appear in some translations, however the word, "worshiped" does not. My question remains for Jay: Do you feel the son should be worshiped as the Almighty Father? The implication would be the same. I will be here the rest of the evening for discussions." Yes, one must do the same to one as the other. You quoted many different versions, but the meaning is the same. Whatever you do for the Father, you must also do for the Son, or else you are not honoring as the same. It is pretty clear. Anyone can find a loophole in terminology, but the meaning is clear. It is not about words but of equality. Like this

"Just" should be in place between "worshiped" and "as" in your statement, according to John 5:23

Pretty accurate I'd say

All one has to do is remember who wrote the first books of the Bible, Moses! Of course Moses would write God's name where it belonged and where He spoke with the patriarchs. This is because Moses knew it. I understand your point, and agree that they didn't know the full extent of God's character. However, God appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty. That was how he was known to them.

They did not, back up in your Exodus quote to verse 2. "And God went on to speak to Moses and to say to him 'I am Jehovah. And I used to appear to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty, but as respects MY NAME JEHOVAH I DID NOT make myself known to them"

Good question. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob didn't even know God's name.

You are not looking at the whole scripture, it is talking about making idols, that is why the word craftsman is used. If it were just throwing decoration on then you wouldn't need a craftsman. Continue with verse 4 into verse 5, it tells plainly that it is a wooden statue. You are taking a part of a verse to make a law, in a sense. Take the chapter as a whole

I've already addressed Jeremiah 10, and it clearly speaks of producing idols. You've given no further scripture to support your interpretation. Amos also doesn't address the decorating of trees. You can assume that the pagans did so, but it just isn't in the scriptures. The scriptures spoke of making idols. You are using a strawman argument at this point.

You do realize that the whole chapter of Jeremiah 10 is about the idols that people fashioned out of wood, silver and gold. This chapter is talking about how foolish these idols are that men have made, these gods of wood that "cannot speak and must be carried because they cannot walk"(verse 5) We are not to fear them because they will perish (verse 11). Verse 14 and 15 make fun of these "every goldsmith is put to shame by his idols; for his molten images are deceitful, and there is no breath in them. 15 They are worthless, a work of mockery..." This has nothing to do with decorating a tree, it has more to do with fashioning an idol from it.

I really don't get what being a baptist has to do with these cookies. All Baptists do not believe that the future is told by fortune cookies. It really is crazy how this thread has evolved. I think I'm done with cookies and their sneaky god-like spiritism fortunes!

yes, men created yoga and the automobile. Apparently? how is this demonstrated?

You are implying that a fortune cookie and its content is like that of a god? Your quote from Isaiah has more to do with their action of worshiping some god or gods, than it does with wondering if a generic note in a cookie is going to be true. Don't get me wrong here, I agree that if someone were to put all of their faith into what the little slip of paper in the cookie says then they are off their rocker in the first place. I hardly think many people do this. Some do I'm sure, but not most.

Right, it may not be unpleasant either. 1 Timothy 4:4 " For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer."

Right, but stopping at a red light is not against God's laws. Neither is eating a cookie or opening one.

Why don't you give us your opinion, since this is a discussion, and you brought it up

Give me a break bending your body to its capacity and getting a work out, however that may entail is what our bodies were designed for. If people are looking for a direction from men, then they will get it, and be controlled. Relax, take it for exercise and enjoy it. If your mind is taking you outside of God, then yeah, that's not cool. But if you are doing something that you enjoy for a workout, what scripture disallows this?

. "On a wider scale, God has allowed husbands, men and/or superior authorities to make laws or guidelines for the benefit of society as a whole" Not outside of what God has said. That is my point. God has inspired the apostles to write what He wanted, nothing more and nothing less. To question things beyond what God has said, is to allow men to rule instead of God.

"we are left to inquire of others" I disagree, we as adults should inquire the Bible first

Yes, however we are guided by the Bible no? Does the Bible give us direction on eating and drinking? Yes! In two ways: 1 Corinthian 10:27-31 (both are represented here) It is only when men have attached additional laws or rules does this come into question. Colossians 2:8 tells us to beware of these things. Instead of focusing on what men say, focus on Jesus.

Exactly, and shouldn't all evidence confirm the Bible and the Bible all evidence. That is of course if one believes the Bible to be true, which I do. So now, if there is no support for 607, but there is for 587, then why the long held belief in 607? Is it just to make a date of 1914 ring true? It appears that way.

Yes, and that is what I addressed. If you must request permission, then you are asking for the hard and fast rule. But who's rule? The topic IS what I addressed.

"Almost every reference to Ptolemy, especially in the Insight book, has a somewhat negative side added to it:" Yes, however it is still claimed to be accurate in one instance and discredited in another. That was my only point. Using it when it fits the theology and distancing themselves when they like. Back to the point. I agree with your findings here: "It's as if the example above called: "10th Year of King So-and-So" was identified as 405 BCE and then another diary was found for the same king and it was called "15th Year of King So-and-So" and its astronomical phenomena exactly matched 400 BCE." We can only go by what we have, and not speculation on what might have been. So, like you said, there is NO support for 607. What resources can even come close to supporting 607? I mean we have canons, cuneiforms and astronomers from that time, and even IF those don't exactly go in hamony with each other, what evidence is there? If we discredit all of them, then isn't any date acceptable? So do we throw out records if they do not agree with us? Then it becomes the opinion of men and who you choose to follow. I'd hardly throw out ALL historical evidence for the sake of man's wants or ideas.

Based upon the definition of charity, they don't qualify. I noticed you wanted to comment, but not address the questions I raised.

Yes, did you happen to notice the different types of charities that those kids donated to? I looked through your links and noticed that these charities support not a single organization, but rather the good of all. That is in far contrast to the WTS. Does the WTS have a nursing home? Do they have women's shelters? Orphanages? Food banks? What form of assistance can you get from the WTS if you need it? I'm sorry but I just do not see the WTS as a charity. Full Definition of charity plural charities 1: benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity 2a : generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in needb : an institution engaged in relief of the poorc : public provision for the relief of the needy 3a : a gift for public benevolent purposesb : an institution (as a hospital) founded by such a gift 4: lenient judgment of others